Per Jeff's request, and our decision with the consent agenda to honor any request from any Councillor to have an item removed from that agenda, I have done just that and added the consumer metrics item to the regular agenda. Although, it should be noted that given the length of our current agenda for June 7, it is very unlikely that we will have time to get to this item on the regular agenda within the 2-hours allocated to our meeting. Should that be the case, we would no longer be in a position to send the letter before Prague. Stéphane Le 29 mai 2012 à 17:23, Neuman, Jeff a écrit :
If I am crazy, just let me know, but I believe that for non-cross community working groups, when the GNSO specifically solicits feedback from other SOs and ACs, there should at least be some support within the GNSO for the underlying substance. How awful would it be if the we solicited comments, the other SOs and ACs support the statements, but the GNSO in the end does not. In that event, the work of the Working group never makes it out of the GNSO and the other SOs and ACs work on this is for not.
Again, the GNSO community does not have to agree with everything, but I believe should generally support the direction of the substance.
Jeffrey J. Neuman Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
-----Original Message----- From: john@crediblecontext.com [mailto:john@crediblecontext.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 11:19 AM To: Neuman, Jeff; Stéphane Van Gelder; Thomas Rickert Cc: GNSO Council List Subject: RE: [council] [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
Jeff,
I would not want the letter to be mis-interpreted.
I view it serving two specific purposes, both within the scope of a working group. First, it is soliciting input from a legitimate part of ICANN which could, if it wanted to, offer such input without solicitation. In the GNSO working group world, all are welcome, yes?
Second, it is an offer of proof that the GNSO, its Council and the GAC have a mutual interest.
None of this is a bar to continued and vigorous Council debate.
Cheers,
John Berard Founder Credible Context 58 West Portal Avenue, #291 San Francisco, CA 94127 m: 415.845.4388
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [council] [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@neustar.us> Date: Tue, May 29, 2012 4:40 am To: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@indom.com>, Thomas Rickert <rickert@anwaelte.de> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org>
I would actually like to see it discussed as part of the regular agenda rather than the consent agenda. Not so much for the content of the wording of letter, but rather for the substance of the draft advice. The way it is portrayed in the letter, although it says that it needs approval from the GNSO, it implies that the advice does have at least some endorsement from the GNSO community. Otherwise, why would we (the GNSO) be soliciting feedback on it. In my mind, there is a difference between putting something out for general comment through a public comment period vs. sending it directly to SOs for their view on the GNSO’s work product. I know it is a subtlety, but the GNSO Council should be somewhat comfortable with the substance of the draft advice prior to directly soliciting other SOs and ACs views on the matter.
Can we get an update on the draft advice at our June 7th Council meeting and then decide how we want to position the letter?
Thanks.
Jeffrey J. Neuman Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Stéphane Van Gelder Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 4:48 AM To: Thomas Rickert Cc: GNSO Council List Subject: Re: [council] [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
Thanks Thomas.
So far, there has been no disagreement voiced on this list with sending this letter. I can therefore confirm that I have put this on the consent agenda for our June 7 meeting. I will be asking the Council to approve my sending of the letter as proposed.
Thanks,
Stéphane Van Gelder Directeur Général / General manager INDOM Group NBT France
---------------- Head of Domain Operations
Group NBT
Le 26 mai 2012 à 16:38, Thomas Rickert a écrit :
Forgot to copy the Council ....
============= thomas-rickert.tel
+49.228.74.898.0
Anfang der weitergeleiteten E‑Mail:
Von: Thomas Rickert <rickert@anwaelte.de> Datum: 26. Mai 2012 12:10:00 MESZ An: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@indom.com> Betreff: Re: [council] Fwd: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
I am fine with the letter. One question, though: Wouldn't it make sense to put all the topics we would like to discuss in one letter or is this a completely seperated matter?
Thanks,
Thomas
============= thomas-rickert.tel
+49.228.74.898.0
Am 23.05.2012 um 16:31 schrieb Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@indom.com>:
As indicated in my previous email, please find attached my proposed edits to the Consumer Metrics WG letter.
<Consumer Metrics GNSO to GAC.doc>
Stéphane Van Gelder Directeur Général / General manager INDOM Group NBT France
---------------- Head of Domain Operations
Group NBT
Le 23 mai 2012 à 16:21, Stéphane Van Gelder a écrit :
Councillors,
Please see below and attached a letter that the Consumer Metrics WG is suggesting I send as GNSO Chair to the GAC Chair.
I am adding this to our June 7 meeting as a consent agenda item so I would appreciate if prior to that meeting, we have discussed on the list so that we are all either comfortable with the text, or certain we do not want to send the letter.
In order to get the discussion started, I have a few suggested edits to this letter that I will send in a follow-up email.
Thanks,
Stéphane Van Gelder Directeur Général / General manager INDOM Group NBT France
---------------- Head of Domain Operations
Group NBT
Début du message réexpédié :
De : Rosemary Sinclair <rosemary.sinclair@unsw.edu.au>
Objet : RE: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
Date : 22 mai 2012 23:23:51 HAEC
À : Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@indom.com>
Cc : "john@crediblecontext.com" <john@crediblecontext.com>, Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, "gnso-consumercci-dt@icann.org" <gnso-consumercci-dt@icann.org>
Hi Stephane
Here's my suggested note from you to GAC to encourage GAC to provide early feedback to our Working Group on Consumer Metrics.
The WG is currently considering public comments received, including from the US Government. We are working to have the work completed for consideration in Prague.
This idea for specifically reaching out to GAC in this way came from discussion with Bruce Tonkin about how best to engage GAC in this work before we finalise the Draft Advice.
Cheers for now
Rosemary
Rosemary Sinclair | Director | External Relations Australian School of Business | The University of New South Wales Level 3, Building L5, UNSW Sydney 2052 Telephone: +61 (2) 9385 6228 | Fax +61 (2) 9385 5933 | Web: www.asb.unsw.edu.au
________________________________________ From: Stéphane Van Gelder [stephane.vangelder@indom.com] Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 4:27 AM To: Rosemary Sinclair Cc: john@crediblecontext.com; Neuman, Jeff; Berry Cobb; gnso-consumercci-dt@icann.org Subject: Re: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague
Looking forward to your note on this Rosemary. Thanks.
Stéphane
Le 18 mai 2012 à 03:07, Rosemary Sinclair a écrit :
Hi all
I have action to write note to Stephane on this very topic of GNSO reaching out to GAC on this work
Will circulate to our WG for discussion next Tues and then to Chair, GNSO Council
Cheers
Rosemary
Rosemary Sinclair Director, External Relations Australian School of Business UNSW +61 413 734490
On 18/05/2012, at 4:43 AM, "john@crediblecontext.com" <john@crediblecontext.com> wrote:
Jeff,
Berry may be able to phrase it more eloquently, but the matter of Consumer Metrics ought to be on our agenda.
The Council should offer a report on the work so far in setting the definitions and metrics for Consumer Confidence, Competition and Trust that results from the requirements of the Affirmation of Commitments.
As you know, the GAC has a keen interest in this subject and it would be useful to our working relationship to showcase the progress made.
Cheers,
John Berard Founder Credible Context 58 West Portal Avenue, #291 San Francisco, CA 94127 m: 415.845.4388
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague From: "Neuman, Jeff" <Jeff.Neuman@neustar.us> Date: Thu, May 17, 2012 9:23 am To: Berry Cobb <mail@berrycobb.com>, "gnso-consumercci-dt@icann.org" <gnso-consumercci-dt@icann.org>
All,
I am responsible for collecting the list of topics to be discussed during that session. Can you please give me a one or two sentence description of what you would like to discuss and how much time you believe it will take?
Best regards,
Jeffrey J. Neuman Neustar, Inc. / Vice President, Business Affairs
From: owner-gnso-consumercci-dt@icann.org [mailto:owner-gnso-consumercci-dt@icann.org] On Behalf Of Berry Cobb Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 11:46 AM To: gnso-consumercci-dt@icann.org Subject: [gnso-consumercci-dt] GNSO / GAC Session in Prague Importance: High
Team,
It is confirmed that there will be a GNSO/GAC session in Prague. There is already an agenda forming and if we want Consumer Metrics topic on the agenda, we need to expedite the request.
I also learned that the GAC has already contacted the GNSO stating their interest on the Consumer Metrics topic. However, John Berard, as our Council Liaison, should send a note to the GNSO Council requesting this be added to the proposed agenda. The Council will have to agree that this is a topic they wish to discuss. I suspect it will be fairly easy for the Council to approve this topic for the agenda. The only concern will be time allotted to discuss it.
John, can you send this notice to the Council ASAP?
Berry Cobb Internet Corporation for Assigned Names & Numbers (ICANN) 720.839.5735 mail@berrycobb.com @berrycobb
<GNSO to GAC CCI.doc>